Demolition work on the main stand at the stadium in the Friedrich-Ludwig-Jahn-Sportpark in Berlin-Prenzlauer Berg
Three years ago, the approximately 87,000 German sports clubs were recognized by UNESCO as intangible world cultural heritage. Is this unique cultural asset cared for and cared for in a manner consistent with this award?
There is no systematic and conclusive answer to this. In everyday life, the general idea that prevails is that this unique network of clubs has always existed, is large and is therefore perceived as something completely self-evident. This is a fallacy, because this system is not self-perpetuating. In contrast to other forms of organization, it works primarily from the bottom up, supported by each individual club and the commitment of its members. As managing director, I cannot “order” anything; I have to satisfy my members with good arguments and services. The club system, which seems confusing, is very resilient and at the same time constantly reinventing itself. In this way, this cultural asset has survived everything in around 175 years, wars, crises and rapidly changing economic and social conditions. Of course, a legal framework is always required. We just have to be careful that the flood of paragraphs and guidelines doesn’t go too far, that the board members of the clubs don’t raise their hands in exasperation because of excessive bureaucracy, become demotivated or no longer find successors.
In the currently valid sports development report from the Federal Institute for Sports Science It is said that one in seven sports clubs is already under threat to their existence, primarily for personnel reasons. How fragile is the foundation of organized sport?
In my opinion, this analysis is fundamentally correct. Nevertheless, I would reject formulations such as: the “cultural asset of sports clubs” is “endangered” or “threatened”. For me it is not a crisis, but rather a significant challenge. It’s true that this system, with its three cornerstones of money, voluntary work and sports facilities, is under pressure. Personally, my assessment is somewhere in the middle between “everything is fine” and alarmism. When it comes to curbing bureaucracy, what is needed above all is simplification in legal and tax issues. Because the tax issue is predominantly the responsibility of the federal government, we presented an 18-point paper with demands in the summer – based on the German Olympic Sports Confederation (DOSB). Sometimes it’s just the details that bring relief.
Namely?
The Hessian State Chancellery has recently had a “de-bureaucratization minister”, the only staff position of this kind in all 16 federal states. This means we have a direct contact so we can make a difference quickly. Our clubs without full-time employees will continue to not have to pay any fees to the public broadcaster’s contribution service for TV and radio use – they will be able to note this in the relevant forms in the future.
The sports facilities are a major construction site, around 20 percent of which are said to be in need of renovation.
This number is a plausible estimate. For many years, we have been offering various consulting services for sports facilities for clubs and municipalities through our sports infrastructure division. This ranges from renovation and new building projects to eco-checks and schoolyard advice for more exercise by children and young people in public spaces. Thanks to our consulting team, we are very familiar with the subject. For many years, the state of Hesse has paid great attention to this topic with funding programs. In terms of state politics, this is more the exception than the rule. The districts, along with the state, the municipalities and the state sports association, are also a specifically Hessian player in the colorful tapestry of sports funding. Under these circumstances, it is fortunate that we are only talking about a 20 percent renovation backlog.
It almost sounds sarcastic…
In my opinion, the sports facilities can become a political breaking point – similar to the state of the railway infrastructure and our bridges, which is now being critically discussed across the country, is the topic of TV talk shows and is taking on political dimensions. The need for renovation of sports facilities, especially swimming pools and sports halls, is so great that the states and municipalities alone are overwhelmed. This problem is part of the general neglect of our infrastructure and is comparable to the sad situation in the area of transport routes. As there, the scale is so great that the renovation backlog cannot be resolved without reliable and appropriate federal aid over several years. There is no one who disputes this anymore. It would be bad if federal politics only reacted seriously when there was a serious accident with victims because a hall roof collapsed. An example: Here in Hochtaunus, several halls from the 1970s have been closed for around three years due to construction defects – physical education classes have largely been canceled. Another example: Children resist going to the toilet and prefer to hold on until they get home because the condition of the sanitary facilities is unacceptable.
The “Sport Development Plan” could have brought about federal political solutions; you yourself were involved in the “Sustainable Sports and Exercise Spaces” working group…
This forum with representatives from several federal ministries, among others, would have been an opportunity for a big success. But over the course of this one year, I got the more and more impression that the federal government cannot or does not want to activate enough creative power. The federal representatives repeatedly softened the issue and the final report was very far removed from the consultation results. So this project inevitably failed in the spring of this year. A great opportunity was missed. Much to the chagrin of the DOSB, which was actively involved in this process. While the entire country debates the poor state of the infrastructure and calls for renovation offensives, the federal government ended the only remaining federal sports facility funding program – even though the “traffic light” had expressly acknowledged its responsibility for the provision of sports facilities in the coalition agreement. This is more than irritating.
Speaking of DOSB. What do you expect from the umbrella organization, which has its headquarters in the Frankfurt city forest in the immediate vicinity of the LSB Hessen?
The “special real estate category of sports facilities” has unfortunately become a forgotten type of infrastructure in federal politics and has clearly become a “blind spot” for federal politics. There isn’t even a remotely coherent strategy there. What is all the more surprising given this enormous need for renovation is that it would at the same time provide impetus for the respective regional construction industry, climate policy goals could be achieved and the sports facility issue also has a positive attitude among the population. And quite fundamentally, there is a state mandate to provide adequate infrastructure for sport that is oriented towards the common good and its clubs. After the failed “Sports Development Plan”, the next step for the DOSB would have to be to take energetic action towards the federal government.
